Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/08/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Gwpics@aol.com wrote: > > I feel that many of you have missed Tina's point. I don't think anyone is > doubting the fact that, if you do similar large prints off 5" x 4", 6 x 6 and > 35mm negs, you will see a difference in grain, etc. In most cases the 5" x > 4" will win hands down in this respect no matter how carefully the film is > processed. > > I feel that the point that the article (and, in turn,Tina) was trying to make > is that you are far more likely to capture the character and ambience of your > subject using a discrete 35mm camera (such as the Leica) than using a > Hasselblad or 5" x 4" camera. And just try shooting sport on either of the > others! No one is doubting that still life for advertising is better done > on large format with tilt and shift, but try taking that into the home of a > Honduran peasant and seeing how you get on! > > Gerry (UK) I have to regretfully admit that I've shot a billion biformat weddings and have therefore been subjected to billions and billions of little proofs and prints all piled next to each other and in books that were shoot with 35mm and 6x6. Even at 4x5 my wife and I could spot them from across the room. OK the 6x6 will tend to be a bit more formalized but there is a creaminess of tone which sets it apart from 35mm. But 35 "gets" the shot. Mark Rabiner